In this section the relative order of nominal arguments and clause adverbials such as waarskynlik probably is discussed. Broekhuis et al. (2015:1608-1609) assume that all nominal arguments arise in the lexical domain, i.e. to the right of the clause adverbial(s) from where those referring to new information shift to the functional domain to the left of the clause adverbials in the middle field (MF), having been base-generated in the lexical domain. In the present discussion it will only be assumed that in a neutral order nominal arguments displaying discourse-old information are generally found before or to the left of clause adverbials in MF, whereas those expressing discourse-new information occur after or to the right of clause adverbials.

In Afrikaans the subject is consistently juxtaposed to verb-first (V1), as in (6a) (where it can therefore only follow V1), or to verb-second (V2), where it either occurs before V2, as in (6b), or directly after V2, as in (6c), or directly after a complementiser, as in (6d). In (6a), (6c) and (6d) the subject is therefore the first constituent of MF.

The phrase die nuwe rekenaar the new computer appears before the clause adverbial waarskynlik probably in (7a), and therefore refers to a particular computer which the speaker is familiar with, i.e. old information in the discourse context. It is an instrument which Albert is known to have access to, hence discourse-old information. However, in (7b), where die nuwe rekenaar appears after the clause adverbial, the thrust of the clause is that Albert chooses to make use of the new computer specifically. The computer therefore represents discourse-new information.

The information structure of a clause can be gauged by formulating an appropriate question. Thus the sentences in (7) would be adequate responses to the questions posed in (8a) and (8b) respectively.

The Afrikaans subject and object have the following ordering constraints:

• As mentioned earlier, the subject is never separated by non-verbal material from V1 and V2, as is the case in (9a) and (9ai), respectively. This goes for any subject, whether definite or not and whether generic or not, e.g. 'n agent an agent, die agent the agent or agente agents.
• Apart from object topicalisation, subject and object always occur in subject > object order, and never cross over, as in (9b).

Three default structures combining information structure, ordering and stress placement are posited as exmples (1) to (12) in the light of the following considerations:

• The subject, which is sy she in the examples below, is not separable from the complementiser (or otherwise from V1 and V2).
• Discourse-old information or presuppositions typically occur before a clause adverbial, such as dalk perhaps, in the MF, while discourse-new information containing the clausal focus would form part of the section after a clause adverbial.
• A pronoun, such as dit it, is semantically less suitable as a carrier of new information and would therefore generally occur before the clause adverbial.
• An indefinite NP is typically a carrier of new information and would therefore tend to occur after a clause adverbial.
• Main sentence stress is usually placed on a non-verbal component immediately preceding the final lexical verb (FV), and in the absence of such component, on FV itself.
• The focus, i.e. the section referring to new information, may be transferred to the another component such as the subject of the clause through the replacement of sentence stress by contrastive stress.

In example (10) the indefinite NP'n geheime kode a secret code is the focus and receives sentence stress naturally in that position.

In example (11a) it is shown that the definite NPdie geheime code the secret code can appear afterdalk as the focus of new information, in which case it also bears sentence stress, or before dalk as old information, creating an opportunity for the lexical past participle, ontsyfer cracked, to receive sentence stress, as in (11b).

In example (12) both subject and object precede dalk as discourse-old information, and the way is paved for the past participle of the final lexical verb, ontsyfer, to receive sentence stress.

If the direct and indirect object are NPs, the only possible order is indirect object (IO) > direct object (DO), irrespective of their placement vis-à-vis a clause adverbial such as dalk perhaps. If the IO is an NP, it has to be placed before (i.e. to the left of) the clause adverbial, as in (13a). If the IO is a PP, e.g. vir Anna / haar for Anna / her, it can occur before or after the clause adverbial, as in (13b). A cross-over of arguments, i.e. DO > IO, is only possible if the IO is a PP, as in (13c). In general, a pronoun such as dit it is slightly marked when positioned after a clause adverbial.

Even in passives, where an IO can precede the passive subject in Dutch, the sequence IO > SUB is unlikely as the IO assumes subject characteristics in the Afrikaans passive, cf. (14b).